SullCrom v. DPW Forum

[Anonymous User]

have at it. reasons would be nice.

[vamedic03]

have at it. reasons would be nice.

You need to provide more info:

1) What practice areas?

2) Did you have any preference for one or the other during your callback, i.e., did either feel like a better fit?

3) Would you rather work downtown or in midtown?

[Unemployed]

Some background info would be nice.

[Anonymous User]

OP here. leaning towards Lit probably 70/30 odds. my 2 favorite callbacks, liked them both equally. what area of NYC i'm in doesn't matter.

[Anonymous User]

I voted for DPW. That's where I worked this past summer. They're well regarded in most practice areas and their culture is, in my view, as good as it gets in biglaw. While the hours are going to be brutal regardless of which firm you go (WLRK and CSM just give you an extra helping of brutal), the respectful, low-key culture at DPW at least takes some of the sting away. The location is pretty sweet as well--lots of great food options. The main downside to DPW is that it's a market follower when it comes to comp. This doesn't strike me as being particularly important at this point in time--"special bonuses" probably won't be reappearing for quite some time and DPW seems to be willing to match market (for bonuses), though perhaps with some reluctance.

That said, DPW over Sullivan is not a no-brainer. It's important to gauge the practice area strengths of each firm (see chambers) and see which culture fits you best. I'd definitely do second visits and talk with some 3L alums (the firms can set you up with them, if you don't happen to know any personally) to get a better feel for each of them.

[Anonymous User]

I paralegaled at DPW for a year and a half before law school, and absolutely loved it. loved the people loved the firm. go there.

[vamedic03]

OP here. leaning towards Lit probably 70/30 odds. my 2 favorite callbacks, liked them both equally. what area of NYC i'm in doesn't matter.

Both are very, very strong firms and you be hard pressed to do better than those two in NYC. Talk to people who summered there, talk to junior associates, and go on second callbacks. Those firms will pay for lunches with former summers - take advantage of this to get all the info you need. Ask any question that comes to mind - and find someone to provide accurate answers to your questions. At this point, its the firm's job to recruit you.

FWIW - I think location matters a bit - do you like pushing through crowds in midtown? Do you plan to live in Brooklyn where the commute is shorter to SullCrom?

I personally liked SullCrom the most of any NYC firms that I interviewed with. I felt the associates there were very, very honest about the work and the work load.

[Anonymous User]

Mind if I throw in a secret option C? How about these two in comparison to Simpson?

[Anonymous User]

Mind if I throw in a secret option C? How about these two in comparison to Simpson?

Pretty much had this choice last year and went with STB, have never regretted it even for a second. It's not unheard of our thought of as strange among anyone I talked to, the firms aren't exactly the same so there are legitimate reasons for choosing any one over the others. Law school students tend to think vault is like the rankings for law schools, it isn't (unless you know for sure you want to do public corporation M&A work, in which case go to S&C but be careful what you wish for).

[Anonymous User]

bump.

[Anonymous User]

The two firms are pretty much interchangeable in every way. Midtown versus Downtown is pretty much the only meaningful difference.

[Anonymous User]

The two firms are pretty much interchangeable in every way. Midtown versus Downtown is pretty much the only meaningful difference.

Differences in culture? Sorts of career paths taken on by people who leave the firm?

[Anonymous User]

The two firms are pretty much interchangeable in every way. Midtown versus Downtown is pretty much the only meaningful difference.

Differences in culture? Sorts of career paths taken on by people who leave the firm?

Both are NYC factories. Both send people to more or less the same jobs, with S&C maybe having a tighter relationship with banks and DPW having a better connection to financial regulatory bodies.

Unless you have some specific practice area in mind that might tip the scale, midtown versus downtown is still the most salient difference.

[Anonymous User]

Any discernible difference between SullCrom/DPW and Cleary (location aside)?

[Anonymous User]

Any discernible difference between SullCrom/DPW and Cleary (location aside)?

Aside from location and culture, there's also office space issues. I'm not sure what the deal is at S&C, but at DPW a lot of associates have to share offices until they're 3rd or 4th years. At Cleary, you get your own office as a 1st year.

[legends159]

anyone buy into the difference in culture and how they treat associates? Does one work their associates more than the other? Will the exit options be exactly the same at both?

[M51]

A lot of these comparison questions no one will really know, because there're a very small # of people who have actually worked at 2 or more of these firms... and they're probably not posting here. And in terms of hours, the particular deal you're staffed on will determine your hours for that week/month much more than which firm you happen to work for. If things need to be done asap, and you're on that deal, it doesn't matter where you work, you'll have to do it. Other than those situations, I think most firms will be fine with you working 9-6.

I summered with Davis Polk last summer and the atmosphere and people were as advertised. In terms of the hours, I was on the M&A floor so there were weeks where the entire floor was essentially empty past 6PM, and there were weeks where it seemed the entire floor was still there past 10PM. I'm sure its like that at all of these places. Davis Polk had an excellent summer program which I thought was very well balanced between the fun parts like lunches and events, and the actual work parts where you are essentially treated like a first year associate. There was everything from client contact to drafting and turning contracts. Responsibility seems to come very early in the corporate departments, and there were several deals I saw where a 3rd year associate was essentially running the nuts and bolts of the deal with the client. Overall, I learned more over the summer than 2 years of law school and I can't imagine a better place to start my career.

Personally, I would go with whichever firm you felt gave you the best vibe during callbacks when they walked you around the offices. Try to remember things like what kind of interactions did you see between the lawyers, with the staff, around the water cooler? They don't send a firmwide e-mail saying "Law students will be in the office today at 2:15PM walking around, so please be on your best behavior", so that's your best shot at seeing what the general atmosphere is really like. If you can't remember, I would take up the firms' offer to take a second look around the firm. Unless there is some niche area of the law you want to practice that one firm has and the other doesn't, your enjoyment of your work will depend a lot on your surroundings (the surroundings you'll be in for most of your waking life from now on), which includes everything from the office space, to the decor, to the people you work with, to your assistant, etc.

But yeah, the rumors are true. Davis Polk is pretty nice.

[Anonymous User]

Bump

I am currently deciding between Sullivan & Cromwell and Davis Polk, but unlike the OP, I am interested in pure m&a work. Is it truly the case that sullcrom has a marginally better m&a practice, while dpw wins out in capital markets? if so, are the differences big enough to outweigh other considerations like fit and location?

thanks

[Anonymous User]

Bump

I am currently deciding between Sullivan & Cromwell and Davis Polk, but unlike the OP, I am interested in pure m&a work. Is it truly the case that sullcrom has a marginally better m&a practice, while dpw wins out in capital markets? if so, are the differences big enough to outweigh other considerations like fit and location?

thanks

Same, but with STB also in the mix.

[Anonymous User]

Any discernible difference between SullCrom/DPW and Cleary (location aside)?

If international opportunities matter to you at all, Cleary sends approx half its summer class to one of its overseas offices for a month. I know S&C and DPW send some, but I don't think its nearly as many.

[Anonymous User]

Bump

I am currently deciding between Sullivan & Cromwell and Davis Polk, but unlike the OP, I am interested in pure m&a work. Is it truly the case that sullcrom has a marginally better m&a practice, while dpw wins out in capital markets? if so, are the differences big enough to outweigh other considerations like fit and location?

thanks

The league tables definitely show Sullivan on top for M&A, and Davis Polk on top for capital markets. This clearly matters for the firms --- high-margin M&A helps buoy Sullivan's extremely high RPL (second only to Wachtell).

Whether this matters for associates is a different matter. Davis's M&A department is smaller than Sullivan's, which limits its showing in the league tables since it can't take on as many big deals. From the point of view of an associate, that's not really a downside, because the firm still does huge deals that you can talk about when you leave the firm and interview for a new job. Besides that, deal size isn't really proportional to skill building as an associate. If anything you want to work on lots of smaller, mid-market deals where you get a lot of responsibility (which Davis Polk doesn't really do, but Skadden, Latham, and Kirkland do).

[Anonymous User]

Also deciding between these two firms, I definitely want to do corporate but don't have a specific practice area in mind yet. Location doesn't matter to me, but I plan on trying to stick it out for partner (longshot at either, i know) and was wondering if anyone has any thoughts on the difference in partner compensation between the two firms. DPW is lockstep (which they really emphasized in the interview as being a positive) whereas Sullivan is not. I assume Sullivan partners are compensated based on the revenue they generate. Anyone have any thoughts on the difference between the partner compensation structures (ie, whether it would affect your life as an associate or which you would prefer to have if you were going to be a partner)?

[Anonymous User]

FWIW I'm in a similar situation with my interest being M&A and my choices were SullCrom v. DPW v. Skadden and I've basically decided on Skadden. I'm not entirely sure my thought process was 100% rational, and a lot of it probably came down to the vibes I had with the firm. I just liked the fact that so much of Skadden revolved around M&A and while they still have strong litigation, I don't think they are particularly "known" for it. On the other hand, SullCrom to me seemed almost just as well known for their litigation as they were for their M&A. But to add, I think if its SullCrom v. DPW and you understand the relative culture differences of both and that doesn't separate it than go to SullCrom. I think its a bit buyer beware (not that SullCrom is necessarily terrible culture wise, I'm sure its overstated, but DPW seemed like an outlier in the sense that they had a very respectful and more collegial culture), but if you understand that and are still torn, I think you go with SC.

[GeePee]

FWIW I'm in a similar situation with my interest being M&A and my choices were SullCrom v. DPW v. Skadden and I've basically decided on Skadden. I'm not entirely sure my thought process was 100% rational, and a lot of it probably came down to the vibes I had with the firm. I just liked the fact that so much of Skadden revolved around M&A and while they still have strong litigation, I don't think they are particularly "known" for it. On the other hand, SullCrom to me seemed almost just as well known for their litigation as they were for their M&A. But to add, I think if its SullCrom v. DPW and you understand the relative culture differences of both and that doesn't separate it than go to SullCrom. I think its a bit buyer beware (not that SullCrom is necessarily terrible culture wise, I'm sure its overstated, but DPW seemed like an outlier in the sense that they had a very respectful and more collegial culture), but if you understand that and are still torn, I think you go with SC.

I think Skadden's Lit practice is much stronger vis-a-vis its M&A work than S&C's.

[Anonymous User]

FWIW I'm in a similar situation with my interest being M&A and my choices were SullCrom v. DPW v. Skadden and I've basically decided on Skadden. I'm not entirely sure my thought process was 100% rational, and a lot of it probably came down to the vibes I had with the firm. I just liked the fact that so much of Skadden revolved around M&A and while they still have strong litigation, I don't think they are particularly "known" for it. On the other hand, SullCrom to me seemed almost just as well known for their litigation as they were for their M&A. But to add, I think if its SullCrom v. DPW and you understand the relative culture differences of both and that doesn't separate it than go to SullCrom. I think its a bit buyer beware (not that SullCrom is necessarily terrible culture wise, I'm sure its overstated, but DPW seemed like an outlier in the sense that they had a very respectful and more collegial culture), but if you understand that and are still torn, I think you go with SC.

I think Skadden's Lit practice is much stronger vis-a-vis its M&A work than S&C's.

Glad to see you say this b/c I was thinking same as well. Currently in same boat choosing between S&C and Skadden, focusing on lit., and leaning towards Skadden.

To be frank, this feels like a crap shoot.